Larry Posted July 16, 2014 Author Share Posted July 16, 2014 Why is it our problem? Why do we have to try to fix everything? If they are not citizens its not our problem. It's our problem because they're in our country. So again, what do you propose we do? Another vote for "kick thousands of children onto the streets, and ignore them"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mocountyskins Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I would say turn them around or kick them out but I'm cold hearted. I don't have problems with people immigrating here if they can support themselves. Kids can't support themselves so someone has to pick up the tab. I don't think the government should use its resources on these kids when we have our own starving kids who only eat with free school meal plans. If its a humanitarian movement then what makes the south American kids more special then the kids starving in Africa. If we are going that route then who is to say what kids are more important than others. Those kids need help also. A shared border should not be the only determination of giving kids aid. Because when kids are dying a border should not matter if you want to go that route. This is all really offensive attempts at trying to win voters. Everyone is trying to get in on the humanitarian feeding frenzy. Abusing these kids for votes and it goes both ways. On both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Congress passed a law which is creating the impression that our boarders are open to children of south america... That's our problem. Congress is going to have to fix the law, or at a minimum provide the resources to address the backlog. It is our problem, cause it's our boarder and our law causing the problem. does the law need fixing .....or the enforcement? http://findingjustice.org/trafficking-vs-smuggling/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 does the law need fixing .....or the enforcement? http://findingjustice.org/trafficking-vs-smuggling/ The law passed by congress in 2008 before Obama took office, with huge bipartisan support calls for children from central america to receive immigration hearings before an immigration judge. It's the law there is nothing Obama can do about it... Only Congress never provided the immigration judges to hear the huge caseload that they just sent into immigration court. So currently their is a 200,000 case backlog, or 3-4 years wait. The kids can't be deported before their hearing, nor can their families.. The smart thing to do would be either repeal the law, or add about 100 immigration judges to the docket until that backlog is gone and hearings take about a day.. Cause right now the way the law is written, the illegal immigrants with kids, or the kids themselves if unaccompanied get a free pass to stay hear... That law is drawing them to our boarders. The administration says they can't stay... heard them say it on Face the Nation... Only the reality is those kids get to stay for years and their is nothing Obama or Boarder Control or Homeland Security can do about it... Congress passed a law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 16, 2014 Author Share Posted July 16, 2014 But you see, twa has decided that that law doesn't apply to these kids. So Obama can just decide the law doesn't apply and ship them off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 But you see, twa has decided that that law doesn't apply to these kids. So Obama can just decide the law doesn't apply and ship them off. And of coarse he can't because the law specifically identify's those kids... which is why those kids are swarming across our boarders to take advantage of that law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 But you see, twa has decided that that law doesn't apply to these kids. So Obama can just decide the law doesn't apply and ship them off. he has a habit of it....perhaps he could just delay enforcing that part Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I'd rather leave the political parties out of the discussion. But your article does raise some non-political things that should be discussed, too. One that leaps out at me, is the conditions under which the children are being kept. Now, I assume that they're being kept in conditions which are similar to those used for adult illegal immigrants. (Although I don't know. Aren't the vast majority of captured adults simply given a court date, and turned loose?) (For reasons which, I have to confess, I really don't get. But that's not for this thread.) What should be done about their conditions? Looks like what Obama is proposing is to give the government power to speed up the "ship them back home" solution. Admittedly, that's one way to improve their conditions, is to make them briefer. I'd really appreciate it if anybody has any clue as to how viable a solution the "ship them back home" option really is, though. For example, are they even able to identify these kids? How do you propose to do that? Before they enter the country, we have no jurisdiction, and no crime. Once they're here, they're here. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/07/big-update-baptist-child-and-family-services-withdraws-bid-for-palm-aire-resort-video/ Given that they are coming from poverty areas in a third world country, I seriously doubt that their living conditions here are worse than where they come from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 16, 2014 Author Share Posted July 16, 2014 http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/07/big-update-baptist-child-and-family-services-withdraws-bid-for-palm-aire-resort-video/ Give that they are coming from poverty areas in a third world country, I seriously doubt that their living conditions here are worse than where they come from. So, your point is "where they are now is good enough for them to stay for the next 4-5 years"? (I confess that I'm not sure what the typical conditions for these kids are, right now. If somebody knows, it might be nice to share.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 It kind've sucks responding in a thread and getting ignored. I live near one of the bases and all accounts indicate the kids are being housed in temporary military-like quarters. They are getting some english lessons. There was a Swineflu and pneumonia breakout as well. Therd have been ads placex in local papers for foster parents who will get paid to take in some of the kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 So, your point is "where they are now is good enough for them to stay for the next 4-5 years"? (I confess that I'm not sure what the typical conditions for these kids are, right now. If somebody knows, it might be nice to share.) More than likely. I'm more concerned with what they are potentially bringing in to the country. Can't imagine that medicine in their countries is real high. And we saw what a few anti-vaxers have done to the current rates of measles and whopping cough. Imagine what tens of thousands of children/teenagers will bring. And that doesn't even begin to touch on the drug cartel/gang issues that will arise from this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 It kind've sucks responding in a thread and getting ignored. I live near one of the bases and all accounts indicate the kids are being housed in temporary military-like quarters. They are getting some english lessons. There was a Swineflu and pneumonia breakout as well. Therd have been ads placex in local papers for foster parents who will get paid to take in some of the kids. Frankly, I've chosen not to respond to your suggestion to kick thousands of homeless kids into the streets with no adults and no care. (Although if you look closely at my paraphrasing of your suggestion, You might be able to figure out my opinion of it.) But thank you for the information. I'm really not proud of the lack of information I have, on this issue. Every little bit helps. Well, your little bit helped. And that doesn't even begin to touch on the drug cartel/gang issues that will arise from this. Yeah, like I said in my OP, I'd really love it if there was some way to keep organized criminals from making money in trafficking in children. But I can't really figure out how to do it. At least with the drug smuggling, there's the possibility that we could take out the profit, by legalizing the drugs. But I don;t think we can eliminate the profit from this operation by simply legalizing illegal immigration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 I'm a fan of the humane option, but I tend to think peaceful people should be allowed to cross borders freely, so maybe I'm not the person to ask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 I'm a fan of the humane option, but I tend to think peaceful people should be allowed to cross borders freely, so maybe I'm not the person to ask. I can understand, even admire, the sentiment. Don't think there's any way in Dallas I'd support the idea, in reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Larry, Not intentionally did I suggest they get kicked on street... they are going to family here or foster homes... which is fine by me. I would prefer they get sent home quicker, or slower but I think in reality it costs too much money. Failing that I've come to embrace the "life in the shaddows" option. People always think that illegals have great lives, they don't... but an undocumented life here is the best compromise to me. One mistake, and you are deported. Can't really have oppurtunities, or great job protection or legal protection. Militarizing border is a desire, only to show we mean business... but again it is cost prohibitive. I know someome who in the past year moved his family back to Mexico due to his status issue and lack of job. I think any CIR needs much stronger legal protections for American workers-serious about a civil-rights type of lawsuit against employets who favor foreign workers (legal or illegal). No one will sue over farm labor jobs... but I have no doubt companies are screwing higher blue and white collar workers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 You have to change the law immediately and fly them home. If we do not do this, we will see a stream of thousands upon thousands more coming to our border and getting to hang out in America for 3-4 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 I think the "going to family here" isn't an option. (It's hard to tell, but I think the blog twa listed that implied otherwise, is working really hard to falsely imply that. But I'm not 100% certain.). Now, yeah, I can certainly embrace the idea of "they stay, but they aren't citizens". (Although I suspect that saying that they can never become citizens, for a decision their parents made, seems a bit harsh. But it does solve the "what if their parents show up" issue). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 in other words ya don't know but have no problem saying those that do know are probably wrong maybe ya will believe the NYT By law, border officers are required to turn over unaccompanied minors within 72 hours to a refugee agency of the Health and Human Services Department. The youths remain in shelters run by that agency while refugee officials try to find family members in the United States who can care for them. If no relatives can be found, the youths are placed in longer-term foster care or deported. Those cited in the report were put in contact with the legal aid groups for help with their deportation cases after they were released from Health and Human Services Department shelters. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/12/us/aid-groups-allege-abuses-of-young-border-crossers.html?_r=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sacase Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 We have to do a combination of things, there is no one magic bullet. I am all for giving the govt money to hire more people to get them processed and out of the country. I also saw an article about Honduras asking for a Mini-Marshall plan. I can get behind that. Honestly we need to engage Central and South America more. This could be a way to do it. IF we help get rid of the gangs and increase opportunity they won't want to leave their home country for a dangerous journey. I do find it interesting that we can find a way to house these people, but yet we have homeless. Might not be a bad idea to seriously engage homelessness after this is done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 17, 2014 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 So, we have an article saying that the children report being mistreated. (Which seems to match the impression I had, when I started the thread. But seems counter to what I've been told, in the thread). (Perhaps the discrepancy is because they aren't all being held in one place, and different places have different treatment. It's possible both stories are true.) And say nothing about your previous post's claim that started off by declaring that the law only applies to children without legal guardians, then segued to asserting that typical immigrant children have family in the US. (And then, later, mentioned that these kids aren't typical, and they have no clue how many have family in the US.) And yeah, I have trouble believing people who try to string together a chain of things that actually don't match each other, and which they then contradict, later in their own message. Comes from great familiarity with you. I do find it interesting that we can find a way to house these people, but yet we have homeless. Might not be a bad idea to seriously engage homelessness after this is done. OT, But we have this notion that we actually can't house the homeless. Because if we do, more of them will show up. And yeah, I really wish we could declare a war on the gangs to the south of us. If we could get rid of them, or weaken them enough, it would sure make their lives better. And it's to our advantage, to make their lives better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 he has a habit of it....perhaps he could just delay enforcing that part Only he wouldn't be delaying enforcing that part, because it's been the law of the land before he took office... He would be rescinding a congressional law which is an entirely different thing. You have to change the law immediately and fly them home. If we do not do this, we will see a stream of thousands upon thousands more coming to our border and getting to hang out in America for 3-4 years. 3-4 years until their hearings... then they choose not to show up at the hearings and they are hear for another 3-4-10 years.... But that's not even the argument I would make... I would say by hanging out this backdoor to spending their youth in our country... we are enticing 8-15 year olds to make a dangerous thousand mile trek to our boarders... It's irresponsible on our part to tempt them to make this trek, If we don't fix this thing more and more will come and more and more will die trying to get here.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Only he wouldn't be delaying enforcing that part, because it's been the law of the land before he took office... He would be rescinding a congressional law which is an entirely different thing. It matters when a law was put into law? ....is that a after oath exclusion or what???? he is not enforcing others and delaying others Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 It matters when a law was put into law? ....is that a after oath exclusion or what???? he is not enforcing others and delaying others I realize this is not really about the 2008 immigration bill. You are using it a s a foil to discuss the Affordable Care Act.. It does strike me funny though that the GOP would be angry about Obama delaying the implementation of a bill they hate. Unless what would make them happy is needless hardships being placed on American businesses... I also find it interesting the GOP is suing Obama for exercising an executive order delaying the bill (obamacare) none of them voted for; while you are advocating Obama use the executive order here to erase a bill a lot of Republicans did vote fore.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 I'm using it discuss the rule of law, and the options available here. you can use his dream act or other selective enforcement for example if ya wish.,.. just don't try to play law is set in stone. (or that it is not binding if passed after election) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 I really want to embrace the open arms idea " bring us your tired huddled masses" Even if we aren't at the tipping point to where it DOES become too much of an economic and social burden yet, we will be eventually. Reagan had it half right. Maybe a current politician can do it all right. Grant amnesty to all here now, but then have a legitimate and enforceable policy to halt the onslaught going forward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.